The Insider News

The Insider News is for breaking IT and Software development news. Post your news, your alerts and
your inside scoops. This is an IT news-only forum - all off-topic, non-news posts will be
removed. If you wish to ask a programming question please post it
here.

Get The Daily Insider direct to your mailbox every day. Subscribe
now!

I still don't know what .Net Core is for, or how it's "better" than .Net Framework...

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010-----You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010-----When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010-----You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010-----When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010-----You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010-----When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

0) Why would an entity that doesn't have skin in the game (W3C) be put in charge of a standard?

1) Does having new stewardship indicate that things will move faster, or will the "too many chefs" rule still plague/inhibit the ratification perocess?

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010-----You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010-----When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

0) I'd say that (right or wrong) it grew out of the standard bodies being more academic and "pure". We still have the IETF as one example continuing this.

1) I'd suspect it would go faster. The 802.11 WG seem to be good for making decent progress, and "the new Microsoft" seems to be better at playing well with others than they have in the past. I do worry that Mozilla might act up just to be different though.

Things were so much better when it was just IE4 and NutScrape, and all you had to worry about was how they calculated table borders.

Remarkably (VERY remarkably!) we used to be able to view all web pages perfectly well, back then, and security was a doddle, when the average page didn't have 13,465 lines of code tucked away behind its fourteen lines of text and a checkbox.

Two things went wrong with the Interwebs:

0. It was supposed to be "for the people", but devs took over, and turned it into a nightmare.

1. "The people" decided that twatter and farcebooj were all they wanted, and turned it into a nightmare.

If the net had been done exactly as I want it, I'd have no room for complaint.

"Back then" we used to have to bend ourselves backwards and tie ourselves into knots to ensure that our sites worked on IE and Mozilla and Safari and then Opera and then Chrome. And then IE evolved and we had standards and quirks mode. And different rendering modes. The box model was the least of our problems, and what you ended up with was hacks on hacks on hacks. And lots of tables.

It was horrible and a massive time suck.

To the general web users, however, "things worked". Because we worked so frickin' hard to make it work.

Standards should have been set before they were implemented. Or, at the very least, before they'd been implemented so long ago that every modern browser manufacturer had implemented them and every web developer used new features as par for the course and everyone was already onto v.Next.

The W3C didn't have to come up with the plans. They didn't have to exhaustively test them (500M websites were well on the way to already doing that). They just had to act as a central repository for the standards, and if they rev'd those standards monthly then it still would have been better than being years behind.

And yet even with all of this they were entirely ornamental because there were no consequences to not following the published standards. Quite the opposite: there were consequences to sticking to the standards and that consequence was losing market share to other browsers that made life nicer.

That means that when a new website is registered it will be crawled by Google’s smartphone Googlebot, and its mobile-friendly content will be used to index its pages, as well as to understand the site’s structured data and to show snippets from the site in Google’s search results, when relevant.

winio pretends extremely well that it's a mobile OS, so it should fool them into indexing it a lot quicker than other OSes that are far more suitable than winio for desktops and laptops -- like iOS, androud, and Symbian.